Brutal Assassin wrote:Just something of note - With Archers/Catapults only being able to assault like tiles, I ended up stuck in a scenario where I had around 30 troops which were stranded with no way of winning. All I could do was attack around the map in a circle. Being an honorable player, I opted to not suicide on someone, but really that is the only option I have that would impact the game. Otherwise I'm just stuck making men waiting for someone to kill me since there is no way to expand outward.

GoranZ wrote:8 castles for 2 players... well that screw the map big time, congrats to the incompetent players that wanted that change to be returned.

P.S. Can someone tell me how can second player win one vs one game?

Then I must be one of those incompetent players

....the thing is that though it worked better for 1v1, the last settings worked definitly worst for all the others settings. We just wouldn't want that.

If chip manages to do what is intending to, and limits the starting positions to 1 Castle (and Noble) per player the issue with 1v1 will be solved .... And we awill all be a lot happier

The thing is, that with 4 castles per player the opponent already knows where the other player is, he should only attack when the time comes(round 3), no strategy involved. For 1v1 the best setting is 2 castles per player, since now we have 8 neutrals per castle. For other settings 1 castle per player should be perfect solution.

OK lets analyze Kabanellas games 1vs1(sorry I took you as example)6/10 ended with win of the first player3/10 ended with win of the second player but first player attacked prematurely(round 2) or attacked council member(not too ordinary strategy)1/10 ended with win of the second player, could be considered as clean win but luck could had good influence in this game

I began several games on this map and I read the last two pages of this topic.

Maybe put 2 or 3 neutral on regions which are close from catsle would enable people who are not in top 3 to get two rounds more to defend.

I think there is a problem of equity with Knight K3. On the second round, the castle B is able to conquer it AND to attack catsle C. It's impossible from C to B, I think it's not fair... Maybe put it on N11. What do you think about that ?

Actually both Castle's Knights (B2 Knight and C5 Knight) distant 4 hexes from K3 (and K3 is at range of 3 from both Castles) - so they are equal in this case

Yes but K3 can be bombarded by B catapult and archer. K3 can also attack both villages of castle B, and by the way easily attack the castle (and without be seen by castle C in fog of war)... That's not truce with C castle

It is the closest map to a chess game i have encountered. Happen to be a president of a local chess club (said only to qualify comments). I believe this is one of the best, most analitical, stategical, multiple scenario maps i have played in all of conquer club.

Whether or not you believe the dice curse you and your ulitimate plan, this map provides multiple attacking options, and plenty of balanced bonus options that are easily got, and easily broken. At this stage, there is limited stone walling (stack building) choke points, that prevent uneccessary long play, as breach points are via all avenues, knights, catupults, archers and silent round the back stuff.

I like how pieces support pieces espically in the attacking format, ie you have charged a knight in and before a front assualt, a catupult can activate via a trebeche. maximizing the final charge.

No map is perfect. But my compliments to he architect, designers, planners, thinkers and feedbacker whom have all contributed.

This is still not better than chess, you have over 1500 years to prove that, but it definetly tips the balance away from luck, or lucky dice into more of a think, think, think map.

It is the closest map to a chess game i have encountered. Happen to be a president of a local chess club (said only to qualify comments). I believe this is one of the best, most analitical, stategical, multiple scenario maps i have played in all of conquer club.

Whether or not you believe the dice curse you and your ulitimate plan, this map provides multiple attacking options, and plenty of balanced bonus options that are easily got, and easily broken. At this stage, there is limited stone walling (stack building) choke points, that prevent uneccessary long play, as breach points are via all avenues, knights, catupults, archers and silent round the back stuff.

I like how pieces support pieces espically in the attacking format, ie you have charged a knight in and before a front assualt, a catupult can activate via a trebeche. maximizing the final charge.

No map is perfect. But my compliments to he architect, designers, planners, thinkers and feedbacker whom have all contributed.

This is still not better than chess, you have over 1500 years to prove that, but it definetly tips the balance away from luck, or lucky dice into more of a think, think, think map.

chipv wrote:Ok I have word this change may be a week or so away so I would like to have a discussion with 1v1 players on this map.

One castle or 2 to start with?

I would like to discuss pros and cons of starting with 1 castle in 1v1

I'll start the ball rolling:

Pros

Game last longer, more challenging, more fair to 2nd player

Cons

May encourage use of Court to try for a quick kill - is this likely?

Maybe.I can see a strategy being to attack the castle then the villages, and keep forting everything back to the noble. Assuming you're building faster than your opponent, it would only be a matter of time. However, that wouldn't be wise, so I don't know how many people would do it.